Re: Vedr. Re: In Defence Of A Goddess - A

From: David Cake <dave_at_752DCpExVraqC14E88W8DoNr4N93tbPOtvz0JeruB4MsO9owm22Oux2Xrl8UVAJQrv7z4d_>
Date: Wed, 16 May 2007 11:19:52 +0800

At 6:12 PM +0000 15/5/07, Jeff Richard wrote:
> > > Apart from the fact that Greg 'n' Jeff aren't flatly
>> > stating that every Vingan is a lesbian,
>>
>> Jeff isn't anymore, but thats how it started on WOG
>
>Rob, I really didn't say that. Here's the quote on the WoG that set
>you off:
>
>"Vinga probably doesn't do anything of the sort [provide her cultists
>with birth control]. Some other goddess might. Vinga is the goddess of
>women who "do as men do" in war. She's not the goddess of birth
>control (that's probably Earth Witch, or Maran, or something like
>that). If a Vingan wants to have sex, she can always have sex with a
>regular woman. I suspect for most Heortlings, Vinga has virginal
>associations (like Athena, Artemis and other such goddesses) or
>lesbian associations."
>
>Note I didn't say every Vingan is a lesbian. I did say it is probably
>socially easier for a Vingan cultist if she doesn't want sex or is
>willing to have sex with women. Then again, the same was likely true
>of the Vestal Virgins. I did say that for most Heortlings, Vinga has
>virginal associations or lesbian assocations. Which would hardly make
>her stand out in the ancient world.

	The problem for ME is that you didn't stop there.
	I have no problem with it being socially easier for Vingans 

to be lesbians, or celibate (though really, the case that Vingans alone miss oout on access to reliable contraception is pretty poor). Its the divine displeasure part that bugs me. As should be obvious by now, bugs me a great deal.

>
>That's it. Heck, I even left open the possibility that a Vingan who
>prefers sex with men can get a Feat from the Marani or a charm from
>the Earth Witch to avoid any consequences.
>
>Sorry if that was such an outrageous statement.

	Jeff, you keep trying to play down what you actually said.
	The problem is, you never actually retract any of it, just 

try to draw attention away from the parts people seem to dislike the most.

        If you come right and retract the bit about Vingans experiencing divine displeasure from pregnancy, I'll be pretty happy. If you'll go further, and state that while there are strong social incentives for Vingans to avoid pregnancy, these fall short of outlawry, I'd be satisfied.

> > I am of course referring to Leika Ballista, the Orlanth
>> chieftan of the Colymar pre/ post Blackmoor the Rabid.
>> Which in fact was the point I was trying to make.
>
>Consider her retconned. The fact is that a lot of stuff from the old
>Dragons Past game just doesn't fit in with Greg's Sartar. Heck some
>of it didn't at the time. Even nearly thirty years ago, Greg changed
>Betty's name to Leika.

        I have no problem with Greg changing campaign events willy-nilly as he introduces them into the history.

        I have issues with Greg changing details willy-nilly 30 years on, after things have been published several times, on more or less a whim. The previous version was perfectly consistent with Glorantha - it DOES fit with Greg's Sartar (which still has Vingans in it), it just doesn't fit with Gregs taste, which is quite a different thing. The case to make the change is weak, and basically reflects the idea that Greg doesn't care that much about consistency with his past works, because its not a problem for him, only for everyone else.

        I understand about things like Elmal, painful though it was. Its a big 'core of the mythology' deal, that has implications through a lot of the history. It really didn't fit in Gregs Glorantha, and though poorly handled at the time, the case for making it was strong.

        By contrast, the Leika thing for me is a case of Greg (and Jeff) saying "you want me to avoid gratuitous incompatibilities with past publications? Why would I care about that?"

	Cheers
		David